Oxbridge 2021: another 6 months of fretting

[DahliaMacNamara]

Will they make the grades? How will grades be awarded anyway? What the hell are Cambridge up to with that nasty little clause?

I was 1984 entry and deliberately chose a college that didn’t ask for the entrance exam.

Ah, found you

Dd just emerged from her lair unreasonably excited about being able to tell O that she had no criminal convictions !

Fly, yes 4th and 7th term co-existed at least at that time in the 80s when both my siblings got into Oxbridge. 7th term was quite a good system as you knew where you stood with A level grades, you were free from January to October for your gap year travels and if you didn't get into Oxbridge you could always be applying somewhere else just as now.

7th term was quite a good system as you knew where you stood with A level grades, you were free from January to October for your gap year travels and if you didn't get into Oxbridge you could always be applying somewhere else just as now.

That's exactly the same as any Y14 applicant these days though Xenia.

Fond memories of arguing with my interviewer who said firmly that nobody could be ‘taught’ to pass the 7th term exam. Our school certainly didn’t offer any teaching for it, but the private school down the road had just built what they themselves called the ‘Oxbridge teaching wing’ - did she think I should go back and accuse them of false advertising?

I was a stroppy kid in those days.

goodbye, yes I agree, same as Y14 today. I think my sibling went back to school for that September to December term with other Oxbridge people (it was a day private school in the NE) but I cannot remember if they went into school every day or how the help was structured.

The Cambridge situation has hit the news a bit today. Interesting quote in the reports;

Mary Curnock Cook, former chief executive of UCAS, spoke of the difficulties faced by universities this year, saying: “This year the challenge will be to make fair offers without opening the floodgates if every applicant achieves their offer conditions.”

Responding to Cambridge’s move to withdraw offers, a UCAS spokesperson said: “In the rare cases of over-subscription, we would expect universities to have an open and transparent conversation with students about their options, with the decisions ultimately lying with the student.”

I think that is telling that UCAS say the decisions ULTIMATELY LIE WITH THE STUDENT.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/cambridge-to-withdraw-places-if-oversubscribed-xzx2jttw2?shareToken=127af788940d179db855027337877dfa

Good to see that the Times has caught up with the points made on MN Errol :)

The comments about dumbing down are infuriating. Do they imagine Cambridge normally has an open door policy based on the assurances from St Custard's that little Molesworth is v v v clever?

I think it would be quite a reputational hit if C followed through with this tbh..

I sent an email to my old college (not DDs) raising concerns about the addition to the t&c’s and got this back.

“The text you mention was added to the University’s general ‘terms and conditions’ document this year, on legal advice following the rapidly changing admissions landscape during the 2020 exam results

This year we have already taken into account the fact that most UK pupils will not sit public exams as usual. As a result, we at (name of college)are confident that we will be able to admit all successful offer holders for the course and year stated in their offer.

Regarding the question of over-offering to fill places, I should mention that we do indeed try to make as many offers as possible, because we would find nothing more frustrating than rejecting applicants at the offer-making stage, only to discover that we have unfilled places by the start of the academic year. Conversely, our guarantee to house all freshers on our main site so they can be immersed in College life does set an absolute upper limit on numbers, so managing our intake numbers can be a difficult, but important, balancing act.

We also reassure all our offer holders that they are welcome to contact us if they have any concerns about their offer, and so far one has indeed contacted us about the clause in the T’s and C’s document. I have hopefully allayed their worries somewhat.”

Not sure if that helps reassure, but I hope so.

Apparently C are making a statement late this afternoon to clarify (or possibly backtrack).

I can't get too excited about this - at worst they will ask for volunteers to defer for a year, probably with a bung if necessary. They absolutely are not going to shunt them down to another university without agreement...
I reckon one in 10 would agree to defer if asked, so job done.

@ClarasZoo

I can't get too excited about this - at worst they will ask for volunteers to defer for a year, probably with a bung if necessary. They absolutely are not going to shunt them down to another university without agreement... I reckon one in 10 would agree to defer if asked, so job done.

Yes I feel the same. With some financial incentive, DD would probably be happy to defer, given that she can easily get a job for a few months (luckily I can employ her) and that we're not certain that October is going to be back to any sort of normality from a covid perspective.

I do think it's quite astonishing that Cambridge think this is fair to students. Just make fewer offers!

I found some of the comments on the Times infuriating too, especially one saying won't the teachers just give Oxbridge offer holders the grades they need. I can't see ds' college doing that although I suppose those with Oxbridge holders are the hard workers and will have high predicted grades anyway.

The UCAS comment above confirms my initial legal feeling (I am a lawyer) that Cambridge probably cannot change the rules like this and that the student decides particularly as this is consumer law. However I have not read the UCAS rules/contracts or anything like that.

Xenia, my hunch is that you are right, because Cambridge don't make offers in isolation, they are part of the whole UCAS process, and decisions you make regarding a Cambridge offer impact on your ability to make decisions on other offers.

I hope Cambridge have got their sums right, it would be devastating for someone to have secured a Cambridge offer, got the grades, and then be told they have to go somewhere else, which may not even be one of their initial choices, but rather somewhere 'with spaces', have the worst of the pick of the accommodation etc. Cambridge would be hammered for that in the press though.

I think C will have their sums right and that they will have over offered minimally, if at all.

If some offer holders are not awarded the required grades, then any spare places can be filled through adjustment.

Xenia my hunch is that the clause is completely fine because it's written in such a way that strongly suggests that a change of college or a deferral are the two most likely options and that a change of course or institution would be an alternative offer, and would only happen with the student's consent.

I think Cambridge would be rock solid in court.

It seems a storm in a teacup to me.

In that the first two options are completely reasonable in these unusual circumstances to put in as part of the terms and the last two options would be a variation by mutual consent. Cambridge is not going to tell anyone they can't defer so if a student refuses - well, their loss.

Also, the offer is made on these terms. Any students in receipt of such an offer has the option to decline it and go elsewhere.

The situation this year is not very different from last year. Cambridge did not have space (for reasons beyond their control) for every student awarded the grades they needed and they had to ask some students to defer or choose to go elsewhere.
The difference this year, is that, on legal advice, these options are explicitly in the offer conditions should another unexpected scenario arise. Striking a balance between under and over offering obviously lies behind it but I am sure that Cambridge will have done theIr sums right to minimise the risk of having to invoke the clause.